[786] B. xvi. c. iv. § 2.

[787] See above, § 2.

[788] This reminds us of the prophet Elijah and John the Baptist.

[789] Od. iv. 84.

[790] This subject was discussed in b. i. c. ii. § 34.

[791] B. xvi. c. iv, § 2 and § 14.

[792] Genadil.

[793] Assouan.

[794] Thus Eratosthenes calculated, in following the windings of the Nile, 12,900 stadia, which is 7900 stadia more than he calculated in a straight line, as he made the distance between the same points (Meroë and Syene, b. ii. c. v. § 7) to be 5000 stadia. M. Falconer suspects that there is an error in the text; but the error lies further off. I believe that it is attributable to Eratosthenes himself, and that that geographer did nothing more than convert the days’ marches into stadia. According to Pliny, Timosthenes, commander of the fleet of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and consequently anterior to Eratosthenes, said that from Syene to Meroë was a march of 60 days; and this statement agrees tolerably well with that of Herodotus, who calculated 56 days’ march between Elephantina and Meroë, besides a small distance the extent of which he does not state.

Procopius, a learned writer, estimates a day’s march at 210 stadia; and employment of this value, in the whole course of his history, proves that it was generally adopted. Now, if we multiply 60 by 210, we shall have 12,600 stadia, and dividing 12,900 by 60, we have 215 stadia, or nearly the amount of a day’s march according to Procopius. I am therefore of opinion that Eratosthenes did nothing more than multiply 210 or 215 by the number of 60 days, furnished by Timosthenes; and as the excessive length of 12,900 stadia could not agree with the 5000 stadia, which he had calculated in a straight line for the same interval, he imagined this great difference arose from the excessive winding course of the Nile; consequently he supposed the Nile to change frequently the direction of its course.

This opinion had its influence in the construction of Ptolemy’s map, which presents to us nearly all the inflexions which Eratosthenes imagined; in calculating the intervals of positions assigned by Ptolemy along the river, we find a total of 1260 minutes; and adding about 1/6 for the small windings, we have a total of 1470 minutes, which are equal to 12,400 stadia of the module (700 to the degree) adopted by that geographer.

According to this hypothesis, the distance in Strabo will be thus divided: Setting out from Meroë, the Nile runs,

which nearly corresponds with the account of Timosthenes. The number of days corresponds tolerably well with the distance given by the explorers sent by Nero for the discovery of Meroë: they reported the distance to be 873 miles. If we divide this number by 60, we shall have for the day’s mean march 14·55 Roman miles, or 11·64 geographical miles, which is in fact the day’s mean march, according to Major Rennell. Letronne.

In carefully measuring, upon a large map of Egypt in 47 sheets, the course of the Nile through all its windings, and with the compass opened to 1000 metres, I find—

This measure reduced to mean degrees of the earth equals 637° 25´, and represents 5312 stadia of 500 (to the degree). I certainly did not expect to find such an agreement between the new and the ancient measures. The periodic rising of the Nile, I think, must have produced, since the time of Eratosthenes, some partial changes in the windings of the river; but we must acknowledge that these changes, for greater or for less, compensate one another on the whole.

We observe, moreover, as I have already often observed, that the use of the stadium of 500 to the degree is anterior to the Alexandrine school; for at the time of Eratosthenes the stadium of 700 was more particularly made use of in Egypt. Gossellin.

[795] Although generally described as an island, it was, like Mesopotamia, a district included between rivers: the city Meroë was situated in lat. 16° 44´.

[796] Tacazze.

[797] Bahr-el-Azrek, or Blue river.

[798] See b. xvi. c. iv. § 8, and Herod. ii. 30, who calls the Sembritæ, Automoloi, that is, persons who had voluntarily quitted their abode.

[799] The Nile valley was parcelled out into a number of cantons, varying in size and number. Each of these cantons was called a nome (νομὸς) by the Greeks, “præfectura oppidorum” by the Romans. Each had its civil governor, the Nomarch, who collected the crown revenues, and presided in the local capital and chief court of justice. Each nome too had its separate priesthood, its temple, chief and inferior towns, its magistrates, registration and peculiar creed, ceremonies and customs; and each was apparently independent of every other nome. At certain seasons, delegates from the various cantons met in the palace of the Labyrinth, for consultation on public affairs (b. xvii. c. i. § 37). According to Diodorus, the nomes date from Sesostris. But they did not originate from that monarch, but emanated probably from the distinctions of animal worship; and the extent of the local worship probably determined the boundary of the nome. Thus in the nome of Thebaïs, where the ram-headed deity was worshipped, the sheep was sacred, the goat was eaten and sacrificed: in that of Mendes, where the goat was worshipped, the sheep was a victim and an article of food. Again, in the nome of Ombos, divine honours were paid to the crocodile: in that of Tentyra, it was hunted and abominated: and between Ombos and Tentyra there existed an internecine feud.
Ardet adhuc Ombos et Tentyra: summus utrinque Inde furor vulgo, quod numina vicinorum Odit uterque locus, cum solos credat habendos Esse deos, quos ipse colit. Juv. xv. 35. The extent and number of the nomes cannot be ascertained. They probably varied with the political state of Egypt. See Smith, art. Ægyptus.

[800] See b. xvi. c. ii. § 24.

[801] In the text ὀστράκινα πορθμεῖα “earthen-ware ferry boats.” The translation is not literal, but a paraphrase.

[802] In the text κειρίᾳ ψυχομένῃ ἐπὶ μῆκος, which is evidently corrupt. Kramer proposes to read ἀναπτυσσομένῃ or ἀνεπτυγμένῃ, and Groskurd reads αὐξομένῃ for ψυχομένῃ “lengthened out.” Alii alia proposuerunt, infelicia omnia.

[803] The Mediterranean.

[804] Od. iv. 581.

[805] ἐγὼ γοῦν ἀπορούμενος ἀντιγράφων εἰς τὴν ἀντιβολὴν ἐκ θατέρου θάτερον ἀντέβαλον. Casaubon, who narrates a similar circumstance which occurred to himself, thus explains the passage: Our author, being in want of codices to correct imperfections in his own, and to form a complete copy, availed himself of another author whose account was identical, being either, as he says, the original or a transcript from the first.

[806] The words “Sostratus of Cnidus, son of Dexiphanes, to the gods preservers,” are rejected by Kramer as being introduced from the margin.

[807] Od. xvii. 266.

[808] Some word, such as κατοικίαι, seems here to be wanting; ὁδοὶ, which some commentators suppose to be here understood, would be unsuitable to the passage, nor would it convey a proper meaning. Kramer.

[809] The word ἐραστής must be here understood, and not υἱὸς. Groskurd.

[810] The celebrated general of Mithridates.

[811] See b. xii. c. i. § 2.

[812] He was prevented from carrying on this war by the senate. See b. xii. c. iii. § 34.

[813] The elder sister of Cleopatra.

[814] Six months after.

[815] About B. C. 49.

[816] B. ix. c. v. § 6.

[817] I have adopted the reading, ἀπολιτικὸν, “not understanding or ill-adapted for the duties of citizens,” suggested by Kramer.

[818] Od. iv. 481.

[819] No longer existing.

[820] Akabet el Kebira or Marsa Sollom.

[821] Baretoun, or Berek-Marsa. “Alexander, after passing 1600 stadia through that part of the desert where water was to be found to Parætonium, then turned inland to visit the oracle of Ammon.” Arrian, b. iii. § 3.

[822] “Wines which have been very carefully prepared with sea-water never cause head-aches.” Athenæus, b. i. c. i. 59, p. 54. Bohn’s Classical Library.

[823] Cape Deras.

[824] The exact site is not ascertained, but it was not far from Aboukir.

[825] “Hellanicus says that the vine was first discovered in Plinthine, a city of Egypt,” and that for those “who, on account of their poverty, could not get wine, there was introduced a custom of drinking beer made of barley.” Athenæus, b. i. c. i. 61, p. 56. Bohn’s Classical Library.

[826] “The Mareotic wine is erroneously stated by Athenæus (p. 55. Bohn’s Classical Library) to have obtained its name from a fountain called Marea. The fountain and town derived their name from Maro, who was one of the companions of Bacchus.” The wine is praised by Horace, Odes I. xxxvii. 14:
Mentemque lymphatam Mareotico Redegit in veros timores. Virgil, Geor. ii. 91, calls a vine by this name:
Sunt Thasiæ vites, sunt et Mareotides albæ.

[827] The Papyrus.

[828] “There is also the ciborium. Hegesander the Delphian says that Euphorion the poet, when supping with Prytanis, his host, exhibited to him some ciboria, which appeared to be made in a most exquisite and costly manner. Didymus says that it is a kind of drinking-cup, and perhaps it may be the same as that which is called scyphium, which derives its name from being contracted to a narrow space at the bottom, like the Egyptian ciboria.” Athenæus, b. xi. § 54, p. 761. Bohn’s Classical Library.

[829] The two kinds known at present are the Egyptian and the Syracusan, which, according to Professor Parlatori, have the same general appearance, but differ in the number of flower-lobes.

[830] That is, the juice was extracted for its sugar; see b. xvi. c. ii. § 41, and Pliny, xiii. 12.

[831] Od. iv. 228.

[832] The Canobic mouth was situated in the bay of Aboukir; the Bolbitine is the Rosetta mouth; the Sebennytic is the Burlos mouth; the Phatnitic, the Damietta mouth; the Mendesian is that at Dibeh; the Tanitic, that at Omm. Faregeh; the Pelusiac, that at Terraneh.

[833] The watch-tower of Perseus was at the western end of the Delta, according to Herodotus, ii. 15.

[834] The horned Pan.

[835] The people of Busiris worshipped Isis, and at one epoch, according to Hellenic tradition, sacrificed red men, who came over the sea, i. e. the nomades of Syria and Arabia.

[836] Od. iv. 481.

[837] In this nome tradition affirmed that the Hebrew legislator was born and educated.

[838] καὶ is omitted in the translation, as Groskurd proposes.

[839] Memphis was the residence of the Pharaohs, who succeeded Psammitichus, B. C. 616. The Memphite Nome rose into importance on the decline of the kingdom of Thebaïs, and was itself in turn eclipsed by the Hellenic kingdom of Alexandria. The village of Mitranieh, half concealed in a grove of palm trees, about ten miles south of Gizeh, marks the site of the ancient Memphis. The successive conquerors of the land, indeed, have used its ruins as a stone quarry, so that its exact situation has been a subject of dispute. Major Rennell, however, brings incontestable evidence of the correspondence of Mitranieh with Memphis. Its remains extend over many hundred acres of ground, which are covered with blocks of granite, broken obelisks, columns, and colossal statues. The principal mound corresponds probably with the area of the great temple of Ptah. Smith.

[840] The Egyptians say that the ox Mneyis is sacred to the sun, and that Apis is dedicated to the moon. Ælian de Nat. Animal. ii. 11.

[841] Saïs stood in lat. 30° 4’ N., on the right bank of the Canopic arm of the Nile. The site of the ancient city is determined not only by the appellation of the modern town Sa-el-Hadjar, which occupies a portion of its area, but also by mounds of ruin corresponding in extent to the importance of Saïs, at least, under the later Pharaohs. The city was artificially raised high above the level of the Delta to be out of the reach of the inundations of the Nile, and served as a landmark to all who ascended the arms of the river, from the Mediterranean to Memphis. Its ruins have been very imperfectly explored, yet traces have been found of the lake on which the mysteries of Isis were performed, as well as of the temple of Neith (Athene) and the necropolis of the Saïte kings. The wall of unburnt brick which surrounded the principal buildings of the city was 70 feet thick, and probably, therefore, at least 100 feet high. It enclosed an area 2325 feet in length by 1960 in breadth. Beyond this enclosure were also two large cemeteries, one for the citizens generally, and the other reserved for the nobles and priests of the higher orders. Saïs was one of the sacred cities of Egypt: its principal deities were Neith, who gave oracles there, and Isis. The mysteries of the latter were celebrated with unusual pomp on the evening of the Feast of Lamps. Herodotus (ii. 59) terms this festival the third of the great feasts in the Egyptian calendar. It was held by night; and every one intending to be present at the sacrifices was required to light a number of lamps in the open air around his house. At what season of the year the feast of burning lamps was celebrated, Herodotus knew, but deemed it wrong to tell (ii. 62); it was, however, probably at either the vernal or autumnal equinox, since it apparently had reference to one of the capital revolutions in the solar course. An inscription, in the temple of Neith, declared her to be the Mother of the Sun. It ran thus, “I am the things that have been, and that are, and that will be; no one has uncovered my skirts; the fruit which I brought forth became the Sun.” It is probable, accordingly, that the kindling of the lamps referred to Neith, as the author of light. On the same night, apparently, were performed what the Egyptians designated as the “Mysteries of Isis.” Saïs was one of the supposed places of interment of Osiris, for that is evidently the deity whom Herodotus will not name (ii. 171), when he says that there is a burial-place of him at Saïs in the temple of Athene. The mysteries were symbolical representations of the sufferings of Osiris, especially his dismemberment by Typhon. They were exhibited on the lake behind the temple of Neith. Portions of the lake may be still discerned near the hamlet Sa-el-Hadjar. Smith, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geography, Art. Saïs.

[842] The evil or destroying genius.

[843] Suez.

[844] Pharaoh Necho, under whom and in the execution of the work 120,000 labourers perished. Herod. ii. 158.

[845] κλειστὸν ἐποίησαν τὸν Εὔριπον, “closed the Euripus.” Diodorus Siculus, i. 33, thus speaks of this same work. “Darius the Persian left the canal unfinished, as he was informed by some persons, that by cutting through the isthmus he would be the cause of inundating Egypt; for they pointed out to him that the Red Sea was higher than the level of Egypt. The second Ptolemy afterwards completed the canal, and in the most convenient part constructed an artfully contrived barrier, (διάφραγμα,) which he could open when he liked for the passage of vessels, and quickly close again, the operation being easily performed.” The immediate communication therefore between the sea and the canal was cut off by a lock; and as there must have been two, there would be a flux and reflux of water between them on the passage of vessels. This probably suggested to our author the word Euripus, and is to be understood as applying to that portion of the canal included between the locks. By the word Euripus is generally understood the channel between Negropont and the mainland, which is subject to an ebb and flow of the sea. The storing up of water, and the distribution of it for the purposes of irrigation, was no doubt well known to the Egyptians. Diodorus, b. i. 19, ascribes to Osiris the invention. “Osiris confined the Nile by embankments on both sides, so that at the period of its rising it might not inconveniently spread over the country, but that, by gates (διὰ θυρῶν) adapted for the purpose, the stream might be gently discharged as occasion required.

[846] B. i. c. i. § 20.

[847] Bubastis or Artemis, Diana. Herod. ii. 59, 67, 137.

[848] Among those no doubt now at Rome.

[849] This description is illustrated by the remains of the great temple at Philæ, dedicated to Ammon Osiris.

[850] οὐδὲ γραφικόν. These words have been understood by some writers as signifying that there were no paintings, but Letronne has clearly shown that they do not convey this meaning.

[851] George (Syncellus, or companion of the Patriarch), a writer of the eighth century, and who had the reputation of being well versed in history, says that “Ptolemy Philadelphus collected all the writings of Greeks, Chaldæans, Egyptians, and Romans, and had such of them as were not Greek translated into that language, and deposited 100,000 volumes at Alexandria. M. Letronne is disposed to think that Hipparchus, Eratosthenes, Ptolemy, and others borrowed from these sources.

[852] “Sesoosis (Sesostris) raised two obelisks of hard stone, 120 cubits in height, on which were inscribed the greatness of his power, the amount of his revenue, and the number of the nations which he had conquered. At Memphis, in the temple of Vulcan, he erected monolithe images of himself and his wife, 30 cubits in height, and images of his sons, 20 cubits in height,” in memory of his escape from fire when his brother Armais attempted to burn him with his wife and children. Diod. Sic. i. 57.

[853] Probably the statue of Venus bore a crescent on the forehead.

[854] We have reason to be surprised that Strabo, who had seen the pyramids, has said so little concerning them. Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus enter into more particulars, and in general are more exact. Some idea of the immense labour required may be obtained from considerations such as follow:—

The base and height being given, we find for the solid contents—

So that if a wall of (three metres) about 9-1/4 feet in height, and a foot in thickness, were built with the materials of these pyramids, we should have a wall—

The stones, therefore, of the three pyramids would form such a wall 2910 miles in length, or one sufficient to reach from Alexandreia to the coast of Guinea. Letronne.

[855] This is a palpable error, and greater than that of Herodotus, who makes the base equal to the height. The ratio of the height to the base in the great pyramid was as 0·627 to 1; and in the second, as 0·640 to 1. Diodorus approaches nearest of all to the truth, as he makes this ratio to be as 6 to 7 or as 0·817 to 1. Strabo should rather have said, “the sides are rather greater than the height;” but all that he says respecting the pyramids is vague and inexact.

[856] ἐν ὕψει μέσως πως μιᾶς τῶν πλευρῶν· μιᾶς is adopted, although not introduced into the text, by Kramer; μέσως πως is connected with ἐν ὕψει, and not with τῶν πλευρῶν, in the sense of “moderately,” in which it is also used in b. xi. c. ii. § 18. “The kings who succeeded to the possession of the country, (μέσως ἔπραττον) were moderately successful.” The moveable stone has been taken away, and the aperture is at most at about one-twelfth the whole height of the pyramid from its base.

[857] Chembes the Memphite built the largest of the three pyramids, which are reckoned among the seven most remarkable works in the world. They are situated by the side of Libya, distant 120 stadia from Memphis, and 45 from the Nile. These works, by their size and by the artifice and labour employed in their construction, strike the beholder with astonishment and wonder. The base of the largest, the plan of which is quadrilateral, is seven plethra on each side; the height is more than six plethra; the pyramid gradually contracts towards the top, of which each side measures six cubits, and the whole is built of hard stone. Its construction must have been accompanied with great difficulty, but its permanence will be eternal; for although, it is said, not less than a thousand years have passed away to our day (some even say more than 3400 years) since they were built, yet the stones still remain, preserving their original position, and their whole arrangement uninjured by time. The stone is said to have come from a great distance in Arabia, and the process of building was carried on by raising mounds of earth; for at that period no machines had been invented. But it is most marvellous that although such an immense undertaking has been completed, and the whole country around is composed of sand, not a single trace remains of the mounds raised, nor of the fragments of stone broken off by the workmen: indeed the pyramids do not seem to have been raised by the gradual labour of man, but to have been placed by some divine hand in a mass, perfectly formed, down upon the surrounding sands. Some Egyptians undertake to narrate wondrous stories respecting them, such, for instance, that the mounds above-mentioned were composed of salt and nitre, which melted away upon the rising of the river, and completely disappeared without the intervention of human labour. But this cannot be true, for the same number of hands which constructed the mounds would be able to reduce them again to their former state; and 360,000 men, it is said, were employed in the undertaking. The whole was completed in a little less than twenty years. On the death of this king, he was succeeded by his brother Chephren, who reigned 56 years. According to some writers, it was not a brother, but a son, named Chabryis, who was his successor. But all agree that the successor, whoever he was, desired to imitate his predecessor’s conception, and built the second pyramid, which resembled the first in its artificial construction, but was inferior to it in size, the sides of the base being a stadium each in length. On the greater pyramid is an inscription which states the amount expended on herbs and radishes for the workmen, and it informs us that 1600 talents were paid for this purpose. The lesser pyramid bears no inscription, and it has an ascent formed in it through an opening in one of the sides. But although the kings built these pyramids for their own tombs, yet it has so happened that none of them have ever been buried in them. For the population, in consequence of the misery to which these works exposed them, and of the cruelty and tyranny of the kings, were incensed against them as the causes of their sufferings; and moreover threatened to tear their bodies in pieces, and to cast them out with insult from their place of burial. Every king therefore, on the approach of death, enjoined his relations to bury his body secretly in a place undistinguished by marks. These were succeeded by king Mycerinus, (whom some call Mecherinus,) son of the king who built the first pyramid. He designed to build a third, but died before he accomplished it. Each side of the base of this pyramid was three plethra in length, and fifteen tiers of the building were raised of black stone like the Thebaic stone, but the rest was filled up with a stone resembling that of the other pyramids. This work is inferior to the two former in size, but far surpasses them in artificial construction and in the expensiveness of the stone. On its northern side the name of Mycerinus is inscribed, as the person who caused it to be built. He is said to have held in abhorrence the cruelty of his predecessors, and to have been ambitious of leading a just life, and beneficial to his subjects. He performed many actions by which he called forth the affection of his people towards him; and among others he expended a great sum of money in public causes, rewarding the judges who delivered upright judgments, which was not commonly the case. There are three other pyramids, the sides of which are two plethra in length; in workmanship they entirely resemble the others, except in magnitude. These pyramids, it is said, were built by the three before-mentioned kings in honour of their own wives. These works by universal consent are the most remarkable in Egypt, not only in their ponderous construction, but also in the art displayed. We ought, we are told, to admire more the architects than the kings, who supplied the means, for the architects brought their designs to completion by force of mind and the influence of an honourable ambition, but the kings by the power of that wealth which was their portion, or by injuries inflicted on others. There is no agreement whatever, either between the natives of the country or between authors, respecting the pyramids; for some assert that the kings before mentioned built them, others that they were not the builders, but that Armæus built the first and largest; Amasis, the second; and Inaro, the third: but this last is said by some to be the burial-place of Rhodopis, a courtesan, whose lovers were certain governors of nomes, who from affection towards her undertook this great work, and completed at their common charge. Diodorus Siculus, b. i. 63, 64.

[858] Niebuhr says, that in these stones are found small petrified substances in the form of lentils, which appear to be of the same kind of shell of which he collected several at Bushir. Clarke also says, that at the base of the pyramids a variety of calcareous stone is found in detached masses, exactly such as Strabo has described, and appear to be the petrified remains of some unknown animal. Forskal calls them “testacea fossilia kakiensia.” Diodorus, as quoted above, says that there are no vestiges of fragments.

[859] The translation follows Letronne’s correction, ἐπέοικε for ἀπέοικε.

[860] In the text λίθου πωρείας, Groskurd reads πωρίνου, which word occurs in Herod. v. 62, and translates it “tufstein.”

[861] No passage is to be found in his Geography to this effect, it has either been lost from the text, or existed in his other works.

[862] “It is said that the captives from Babylon revolted from the king (Sesostris), being unable to endure the sufferings to which they were exposed in the public works. They seized upon a strong place on the banks of the river, and maintained for some time a contest with the Egyptians, destroying the neighbouring district. At last, having obtained security from molestation, they made a regular settlement of the place, and called it Babylon, after their native city. Under similar circumstances, it is said, a place received the name of Troy which still exists on the banks of the Nile. For Menelaus, on his return from Troy with captives, came to Egypt. The Trojan captives revolted, took up a position, and carried on a war, until having obtained safety for themselves by treaty, they founded a city bearing the name of their native place.” I am aware that Ctesias gives a different account of these cities, and says that some of the soldiers who accompanied Semiramis in her invasion of Egypt founded these cities, and gave to them the names of their native cities. Diod. Sic. i. 56.

[863] This passage presents great difficulties. Kramer expresses himself dissatisfied with any explanation hitherto given. Und so dass der Kanal zwei Mündungen hat, zwischen welche ein Theil der Insel seitwärts anfält. Groskurd.

[864] Book i. c. iii. § 4.

[865] Herod. ii. 148; Diod. i. 66. See below, § 42.

[866] The translator adopts Kramer’s suggestion, of reading εἰσβλέποντα for ἐκπίπτοντα.

[867] The founder, according to Diodorus Siculus, was Mendes or Marrus. B. i. 61.